The focus on ideology has damaged Scottish education

FOR NEARLY A DECADE in local government, I have challenged the SNP Scottish Government’s direction in education. I have spoken out on issues ranging from mobile phone policies to the Health and Wellbeing Census and gender neutral toilets. I did so knowing it would attract criticism. It has. But after nineteen years of SNP control, the patterns are clear and the consequences too serious for people to ignore.

Scotland’s education system was once admired worldwide. It was built on academic standards, subject expertise, and a strong partnership between schools and families. Today, international assessments indicate that Scotland is no longer performing at its previous level. Reading and mathematics results have fallen in recent years, while science performance has remained broadly unchanged. The poverty related attainment gap continues to be stubborn. Employers and further education institutions frequently highlight gaps in essential skills. These are not abstract statistics; they represent real lost opportunities for young people.

This decline is not due to a lack of effort from teachers. They work tirelessly under challenging conditions. The issue lies in political priorities. Successive SNP administrations have placed greater emphasis on ideological frameworks that sit uneasily at the heart of compulsory education.

Teachers should be free to teach; they should not navigate ideological fault lines.

This is most visible in the Relationships, Sexual Health and Parenthood guidance. Analysis of the updated framework suggests that a substantial portion of the material, around sixty per cent, addresses gender identity and related concepts. Relationships and sexual health education are important, but when such a large share of guidance focuses on contested gender theories, it is fair to ask whether priorities have shifted too far.

Questions also arise over who has influenced the guidance. Organisations such as LGBT Youth Scotland and Stonewall have played a prominent role. These are taxpayer-funded organisations with clear policy agendas. They are not neutral arbiters of educational best practice. Both have faced scrutiny over safeguarding and their involvement in shaping policy. Whether or not one supports their broader aims, it is clear they advocate particular viewpoints. When such organisations have a leading role in guidance for every school in Scotland, parents have a right to question whether balance has been maintained.

The concern here is not about respect or kindness, values we all share. The concern is the embedding of a specific worldview in compulsory education and presenting it as established fact rather than a subject of debate.

Internationally, some countries are reassessing approaches to gender identity in schools. In several places, the number of young people identifying with gender ideology appears to have stabilised or declined. Some health authorities abroad have paused or revised medical pathways for young people, citing limited evidence and concerns about social influence. Yet in Scotland, policy continues largely in one direction, seemingly without consideration of these international developments. Good governance requires that policy respond to evidence, not remain fixed on ideology.

I am especially concerned about the impact on children and young people with Additional Support Needs. Many professionals note that these pupils can be more suggestible, interpret information literally, and be more vulnerable to outside influence. Scotland has seen a notable increase in pupils identified with Additional Support Needs. In this context, introducing abstract or activist-framed concepts demands caution. Parents of children with Additional Support Needs have expressed fear of confusion, anxiety, and long-term distress in situations where clarity and routine are essential. Their concerns should be listened to, not dismissed.

There is also a structural issue with how guidance is implemented. Local authorities are told that guidance is not legally binding. In practice, it functions as instruction. Councils must implement, fund, and defend it. Headteachers and staff are trained according to it. Departing from guidance carries professional risk.

Yet when controversy arises — over facilities, census questions, or classroom content — ministers often claim local misinterpretation. Responsibility flows downward; accountability does not. Councils are left exposed, teachers caught in the middle, and parents frustrated by unclear leadership.

We have seen this pattern before. The Health and Wellbeing Census included questions many families considered intrusive, as it asked children about sexual activity and drug or alcohol use. Concerns were initially dismissed until public pressure forced the survey to be withdrawn. The Named Person scheme followed a similar trajectory: ambitious in scope, it dismissed critics and reduced parental input, and ultimately proved unsustainable. Each of these episodes has eroded trust in the system.

Meanwhile, the basics struggle for attention. Teachers report rising behavioural challenges, increasing administrative work, and constant policy changes. Pupils face greater distraction, particularly from digital devices, while decisive leadership on discipline and classroom standards remains limited. Teachers are expected to deliver an expanding curriculum while core attainment lags behind.

This is not about denying equality or the existence of LGBT individuals. It is about proportionality, evidence, and the proper role of the state in children’s lives. Schools should educate, not advocate. They should present biological reality clearly while encouraging respectful debate. They should work with parents as partners, not treat them as obstacles.

Young people deserve confidence grounded in knowledge. They deserve classrooms where excellence is expected and behaviour is consistent. Teachers should be free to teach; they should not navigate ideological fault lines. Pupils with Additional Support Needs deserve stability and clarity. Parents deserve transparency. Teachers deserve leadership that supports them rather than leaving them to handle the fallout of policy experiments.

After nineteen years, the case for reform is compelling. Scotland needs comprehensive change that restores balance and ambition. We must reassert academic standards, focus on literacy and numeracy, ensure content is age appropriate, protect vulnerable pupils, and rebuild genuine partnership with families.

Scotland has the talent and history to rebuild an education system worthy of international respect. Achieving this requires honesty about where we are and courage to decide what must change. Educational excellence is not optional. It is the foundation of national success. Our children cannot afford another five years of drift. They deserve direction. They deserve our full focus.